J.Aisenberg: The problem [...] is that Nabokov, by insisting on doing everything in layered subjective parts[...] has set himself the near irressolvable problem[...] this means that in both Shade and Kinbote the same subjectivity is at work correlating seemingly differing projects--poem and commentary. Isn't this really why they seem like they are the same person? Not because Nabokov intended them to be, but because the practical problems of writing a novel in this way reveals his hand at work in the ooze of both character's minds.
JM: The mistake (present in my Everyman's Library edition) concerning "Triptych" was Shade's, not Kinbote's!
Shade the point is that the three/ Chambers, then bound by you and her and me,/ Now form a tryptich or a three-act play/ In which portrayed events forever stay.
Kinbote: "He awoke to find her standing with a comb in her hand before his — or rather, his grandfather’s — cheval glass, a triptych of bottomless light, a really fantastic mirror, signed with a diamond by its maker, Sudarg of Bokay."
This means it must have been an editorial (E.L's) oversight, not something intended by VN ( unless J.Aisenberg's involuntary indictment of Pale Fire is in operation.)
I tried to compare my edition with another. Unfortunately I only have with me Zimmer's "Fahles Feuer".
In Kinbote's commentary the word comes out as "dreiteiligen Ankleidespiegel", whereas in Shade's poem it is "Triptychon" (ie: with a correct spelling).
Traduttore, traditori? Where's truth, said jesting Pilate?

Search the archive Contact the Editors Visit "Nabokov Online Journal"
Visit Zembla View Nabokv-L Policies Manage subscription options

All private editorial communications, without exception, are read by both co-editors.